Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
Cleanup in aisle ... : The folly of government as grocer is rearing its ugly (and expensive) head in the Hill District. Costs keep escalating for the proposed Shop 'n Save store, and the Hill House Association, which is shepherding this project, keeps talking about the need for more public subsidies. There's only $1 million in private money in this deal. Private developers say such a store should cost no more than $8 million. The Hill District store's price tag now has ballooned to $11.6 million. This is a mess.
Say what?: A number of local school districts are considering selling advertising on school property to defray costs. But University of Colorado researcher Alex Molnar says the practices could harm the students' critical thinking skills by allowing them to accept without question advertising messages. Perhaps that wouldn't be a problem if our schools actually taught critical thinking skills.
Smart move: Allegheny County Airport Authority boss Brad Penrod says he'll lobby the Transportation Security Administration to allow non-ticketed visitors access to the airside terminal's Airmall. They've been barred since shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks. Given the security measures long in place, it only makes sense to restore access. And it should be a shot in the arm to the mall's stores, which once were considered a “destination.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.